From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/12624 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: #define __MUSL__ in features.h Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:43:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20180315194348.GN1436@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20180315183939.GI1436@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20180315185358.GJ1436@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20180315193244.GK1436@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1521142932 27118 195.159.176.226 (15 Mar 2018 19:42:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 19:42:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-12638-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Mar 15 20:42:08 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ewYlL-0006xK-Py for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:42:07 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 8182 invoked by uid 550); 15 Mar 2018 19:44:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 7982 invoked from network); 15 Mar 2018 19:44:00 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:12624 Archived-At: On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 04:37:39PM -0300, dgutson . wrote: > > > >> So whenever we find a bug on musl we should just stop all our > > > >> development until you've fixed the bug? > > > > > > > > No. As noted above, if you need to support systems that might have bug > > > > X, you write a test (configure-time or run-time as appropriate) to > > > > detect bug X and handle it. > > > > > > Precisely, and __MUSL__ would be really useful for this. > > > > Absolutely not. __MUSL__ would not tell you anything about whether bug > > X is present. It would facilitate permanently assuming "musl has bug > > X" because you observed bug X on musl at one point in the past. > > > > Then turn __MUSL__ a number holding the version, as in cplusplus, etc, so > people can do > > #if __MUSL__ < someversion > #endif > > and it will be clear what happens and will solve the chronology issue. This is a never-ending FAQ tarpit. Version numbers DO NOT WORK to indicate presence or absence of bugs, because distros will backport fixes. Apparently you never dealt with the hell of Redhat shipping "2.6.x" kernels that had all the bugfixes from late 3.x, and applications trying to infer stuff from the version number. DON'T DO THAT. If you need to know if a bug or a feature is present, TEST FOR IT. Rich